* Jon Ferraiolo wrote:
>No, that's not what normalization means in this context. It isn't
>forcing a particular reproducible result; in fact, it is going in the
>other direction. It is allowing a user agent to normalize according to
>its own requirements, and thereby possibly changing the value. For
>example, '45.57' via a setter might come back as '45.6' or '45.5698' via
>a getter.
While I am not sure how this would necessarily violate my constraints,
I must say this is an interesting interpretation of the definition-by-
example in the draft: "Numerical precision: "3.0" may be returned as
"3", "3.00" or other semantically identical form". Who would have
thought that other semantically identical forms of 3.0 include 3.04
and 2.96 if that suits the user agent.
--
BjÃ¶rn HÃ¶hrmann Â· mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de Â· http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Weinh. Str. 22 Â· Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 Â· http://www.bjoernsworld.de
68309 Mannheim Â· PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 Â· http://www.websitedev.de/